California Agriculture News Archives - Page 157 of 174

WEST SIDE IS AMAZING—JUST NEEDS WATER!

A West Side Farmer Has a Simple Message

Joe Del Bosque

Joe Del Bosque, a West Side Fresno County diversified farmer posted this on his Facebook page on Tuesday.

“Went to have breakfast in Firebaugh this morning at Giant Burger, who makes the best breakfast burritos and pancakes anywhere. While quietly eating my breakfast, I watched the traffic passing through one of only two signal lights in this little town of 5000,” said Del Bosque.

“During the 30 or so minutes I saw trucks carrying cantaloupes, honeydews, red tomatoes, green tomatoes, onions, almonds, pistachios, grain, almond hulls, wine grapes, fertilizers, alfalfa hay, farm equipment, and enclosed trailers and sea-going containers carrying finished products.”

“This little town is the amazing! All it takes is water,” Del Bosque said!

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 18th, 2013|

SANTA MARIA VEGETABLE MEETING

Central Coast Meeting:

Updates Growers/PCAs on Pests and Diseases

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Editor, and Laurie Greene, Associate Editor

Crowd Listens in the Bonipak Conference Room,

At the UC Annual Santa Maria Vegetable Meeting today in the Bonipak Conference Room, about 75 growers, PCAs and others came to hear the latest in vegetable disease and insect management, as well as food safety and proper pesticide use.

Steve Koike, UC Cooperative Extension plant pathology Farm Advisor in Monterey County, spoke about diseases of coastal vegetable crops.

Koike elaborated on new races of downy mildew. “About every 18 months to two years, we see a new race. Currently we are on race 14, and we still have races 10 through 13 affecting crops,” he said, adding, “2013 has been fairly quiet for downy mildew.”

Steve Koike

“With the increased variety of crops, we see an increased variety of root rot diseases such as Pythium, Phytophthora, Fusarium oxysporum, and Rhizoctonia. For instance, with the higher popularity of spinach, we see more root rot issues.” He noted that growers are seeing a buildup of Pythium in their fields, which affects the plant early in the season and causes the whole root to die. While Phytophthora is still quite rare, Fusarium is less rare and causes the root tips to turn back. “Rhizoctonia is the third major disease affecting older plants, again, turning the root tips necrotic black.”

Koike then spoke about several viruses that affect Central Coast crops. He said that impatiens necrotic spot virus (INSV) has been found worldwide; in Salinas, INSV has been discovered on lettuce. “It’s very important in lettuce but it can also be found in basil, celery, endive, fava bean, peppers, radicchio spinach, and tomato plants. We have lettuce fields in Salinas with 60% INSV, and growers walk away from these fields,” he said.

“INSV and many other viruses are vectored by thrips, which are difficult to manage all season long,” noted Koike.

Other major viruses include lettuce necrotic stunt virus (LNSV) and tomato bushy stunt virus (TSWV).

“We are seeing yet another virus, tomato spotted wilt virus, starting to show up on artichokes. Artichokes are a known host, but it is rare to see the virus affect the crop by causing necrotic streaking in the plant’s stems,” said Koike. “We are concerned that it could be a new strain.”

Koike explained that some Wilt diseases found elsewhere are now moving to the Salinas Valley. For instance, Verticillium Wilt and Fusarium Wilt damage on lettuce have not been detected in this area yet, but need to be watched.

“Before the restrictions on methyl bromide, we did not see these wilt diseases when lettuce and strawberries were rotated around each other,” Koike commented.

“As growers phase out methyl bromide, they have been using bed fumigants of straight Chloropicrin or Chloropicrin plus Telone,” Koike continued. “These have not been as effective as methyl bromide, so when fields are reworked for the next rotation crop, more Verticillium is present, causing yield decline.”

Koike then turned to powdery mildew in Salinas, which is becoming more important in Salinas, especially on lettuce, which had normally not been a problem.

“Powdery mildew on celery is increasing in that now we can see significant symptoms,” Koike remarked. “In fact, if growers can see the symptoms when they drive by the field, then you know there is a problem,” he said.

In other topics at the annual meeting, Heather Scheck spoke about bacteria wilt and brown rot in potatoes caused by Ralstonia Solanacearum.

Heather Scheck

“This wilt is very difficult to control, and it could eventually be a problem in North America due to a new race known as Race 3, Biovar 2,” she said. “At risk are both tomatoes and potatoes.”

Scheck said that the ornamental geraniums are a big host plant of Race 3, Biovar 2. “Geraniums are imported to the U.S. from the Netherlands, Kenya and Guatemala, and a big outbreak for Race 3, Biovar in 2004 forced crop destruction in these countries to prevent exportation of the bacterial wilt,” she said.

“There is no chemical treatment for the problem in geraniums,” Scheck said.

Lisa Blecker

Also speaking was Lisa Blecker, Pesticide Safety Education Coordinator with UC Agriculture and Natural Resources (UCANR), UC Davis.

She focused on crop protection product labels and the importance of following the label especially specific use restrictions. Pesticide tolerances are legal residues, based on the EPA allowances.

“Most crops have pesticide residues, but they are far less than what causes harm to consumers. Tolerances are critical for human health,” she noted.

Tolerance is based on:

Good human health, with no observable harm
Assumption of maximum use of product
Assumption of maximum applications per year

“If growers or those who apply products follow label directions, you will not go over tolerance,” she said.

Surendra Dara, Strawberry and Vegetable Crops Advisor/Affiliated IPM Advisor for San Luis Obispo County spoke about managing thrips on lettuce, aphids on broccoli and the new invasive pest, Bagrada bug, on cole crops.

Surendra Dara

“Western Flower Thrip is a sucking insect that vectors viruses,” he said, “and I did experiments on lettuce using many different products.”

Research has found that thrips can be significantly lowered with chemical treatment versus untreated control. “Softer materials such as Tolfenpyrad alone or with methomyl provides good control,” he said. “Also, some microbial products have potential for thrip management.”

Surendra then spoke about the cabbage and green peach aphid, a particular problem for broccoli, especially at post harvest. He tested several control products in a trial.

He noted Asana did very well on cabbage aphid but not as good on green peach aphid. “However, tests showed that Dow AgroScience’s Sulfoxaflor provided good control for both aphids species.”

“We also treated aphids with a friendly fungus called Beuveria Bassiana, that is showing promise,” Dara said.

Dara moved on to the Bagrada Bug, which was discovered in Los Angeles County in 2008 and is now prevalent in all southern California counties, plus Monterey County. “This pest has a wide host range of vegetables and ornamentals,” noted Dara. “And there is a low threshold for damage because one adult per 10 foot row of seedlings or transplants will cause a stand loss.”

Dara said it’s important to identify the adult Bagrada Bug and closely monitor it during the early 5-6 leaf stage of plants.

“There are many different registered control products that are effective for the pest,” Dara said. He is also working on non-chemical controls such as Fungi, NoFly and essential oils, all of which show promise.

According to Dara, cultural control could:

consider removing weed hosts
ensure transplants from nursery materials are bug free
cultivate to destroy bugs and eggs in soil
shred and disc crop immediately after harvest
rotate to non-host crop when possible

For a video on Bagrada Bug, click below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSj3AZoJIRM

More coverage of this central coast meeting can be found here over the next week.

Thanks for visiting.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 18th, 2013|

DRISCOLL’S MANAGEMENT CHANGE FOR NEW STRATEGIES

Driscoll’s New President to Lead Growth, Capabilities

Driscoll’s, the world’s largest distributor of fresh berries and based in Watsonville, announced changes in the organization yesterday to further advance their global business strategy. “Our mission is to continually delight berry consumers through alignment with our customers and our berry growers,” said J. Miles Reiter, Driscoll’s Chairman and CEO. “Over the last 25 years, we have seen Driscoll’s grow and develop into a multi-faceted leader of the North American fresh berry industry, with expanding brand presence in other parts of the world. The changes in our executive management structure will position the company to build new capabilities for the next 25 years of continued growth in this exciting industry,” Mr. Reiter stated.

Foremost among the changes is the formation of a new global management team that will be completed by December 1, 2013. Kevin Murphy has been promoted to President and COO of Driscoll’s. Mr. Murphy has been elevated from his current position as President of Driscoll’s of the Americas. “Kevin has demonstrated the leadership skills, focus and judgment required to take our diverse global business units to the levels called for in the strategic plan,” noted Mr. Reiter.

Mr. Reiter also confirmed his plan to continue in the role of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Driscoll’s focusing his energies on strategic direction and capabilities.

Mr. Reiter commented, “I am excited by the future for Driscoll’s under Kevin’s leadership. We are putting in place the leadership, organization capabilities and collaborations with our customer and berry grower partners that will enable us to achieve the aspiration of our global vision. Looking to the future, we will have a broader global reach and must be well-coordinated to pursue our core mission across a wide range of geographies and cultural traditions.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 17th, 2013|

DISPUTED WATER FEE INVALID

Judge’s Proposed Decision Would
Cancel Water Fee

In a proposed decision, as reported by California Farm Bureau Federation (CDFA), Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Raymond Cadei says a disputed fee charged to California water rights holders is invalid because insufficient connection exists between the amount charged, the benefits received and the burdens imposed by those who pay the bill. Judge Cadei said the State Water Resources Control Board should not “apply or enforce” the fee, which it has imposed since the 2003-04 fiscal year.

The proposed decision will be the subject of an Oct. 30 hearing at which the judge could affirm or modify it.

CDFA challenged the fee as an unconstitutional tax because those who pay the fee bear a disproportionate burden of funding the water board’s Division of Water Rights. Judge Cadei agreed, noting that “no fees are assessed against the holders of approximately 38 percent of all water rights in California,” and that the fees pay more than a minimal amount “for activities that benefit the public in general.”

As a result, the judge said, the fees “do not provide a fair, reasonable, and substantially proportionate assessment of all costs related to the regulation of the affected payors.” Furthermore, Judge Cadei wrote, there is no evidence that the water board considered fairly apportioning the fees before they were imposed.

“The Board apparently simply determined that it would impose the entire cost of operating the Water Rights Division on permit and license holders, solely because the fee statutes only authorized fees to be charged to permit and license holders,” the judge wrote.

“Farmers and ranchers are willing to pay their fair share to support programs that benefit them, but not to shoulder the full burden of programs just because that’s a convenient way for a government agency to support itself,” CFBF President Paul Wenger said. “We’re encouraged by the judge’s proposed decision and will continue to seek a refund of fees that have been improperly charged to farmers and ranchers.”

When the fee was originally imposed, the water board charged the greater of $100 or 3 cents per acre-foot of water entitlement under a water right. In the most recent year, the fee had increased to $150 plus 5 cents for each acre-foot above 10 acre-feet. One person may hold several water rights, each covering only a few acre-feet of water, but must pay $150 for each one, according to CFBF Associate Counsel Carl Borden. A water district may face hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees each year.

In his proposed decision, the judge also said that the water board had erred by charging water contractors in the Central Valley Project for the full amount of the federal project’s water permit, rather than the proportion of that water actually made available under CVP contracts, and that the board had charged “arbitrary” fees to other permit holders, such as the Imperial Irrigation District.

Since the water right fee was first imposed, Farm Bureau has urged holders of some 13,000 water rights to pay the bills under protest, by filing a protest form with the board when paying the fee to the Board of Equalization. CFBF also challenged the fee in court, pursuing the case all the way to the state Supreme Court, which in January 2011 directed the lower court to take more evidence and hear additional arguments.

“Farm Bureau has pursued this case for many years because we believe fees should be limited to the amount necessary to provide a service, not as a substitute for taxes,” Borden said.

In his proposed decision, Judge Cadei indicated that at the hearing, he wants to hear arguments about whether it should award specific relief, such as for refunds of fees paid.

“While the court’s proposed decision is subject to modification at the Oct. 30 hearing, we intend to do what we can to ensure the underlying decision remains as proposed,” said Dan Kelly, an attorney with the Sacramento law firm Somach Simmons & Dunn, which represents the plaintiffs. “The court’s proposed decision is consistent with the Court of Appeal’s decision in this case in 2007, and is entirely consistent with the evidence presented at trial.”

The case, California Farm Bureau Federation v. California State Water Resources Control Board, was consolidated with a similar challenge filed by the Northern California Water Association and other plaintiffs.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 17th, 2013|

CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU’S LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Agriculture Legislation Goes To Governor

–>

Both the CA Assembly and Senate had their final sessions of the 2013 legislative session ending late Thursday night, September 12th, sending the following approved bills, among others, on to enrollment (the final copy of a bill that has passed both Houses in identical form) and then to the Governor for his action. The Governor will have until October 13th to sign or veto bills passed by the legislature and in his possession.

AB 1165 changes current law so that reduction of a serious, willful, or repeated violation of a Cal/OSHA standard cannot be delayed by an appeal by the employer. Farm Bureau and other employer groups are opposed.

AB 199 encourages state institutions to purchase California grown agricultural products. Originally, the bill would have required state institutions to purchase California grown agricultural products as long as the price was within five percent of out of state agricultural products. However, the bill was narrowed to only require the purchase, to the extent possible. Farm Bureau supports.

SB 726 was a last minute gut and amend that would have allowed the California Air Resources Board unfettered authority to require reductions of black carbon (soot) on all major business sectors, including agriculture. The governor’s office responded to Farm Bureau’s strong opposition and worked to remove the language that contained the new regulatory authority that would have severely impacted California growers.

Black carbon is a component of particulate matter, that is already being reduced from the extensive regulations such as the Truck Rule and the upcoming “tractor rule” that will eventually be implemented in the San Joaquin Valley. Further regulations beyond what is already in place, could go as far as banning the use of fossil fuel in certain instances. With the onerous amendments removed, Farm Bureau and the majority of state’s business community removed their opposition.

The Governor has indicated he will sign AB 10 to substantially hike the California minimum wage. September 11 amendments to AB 10 changed the bill from gradually increasing minimum wages in four increments to $10 per hour by January 1, 2018, to instead increase the minimum wage to $9 per hour on July 1, 2014 and to $10 per hour on January 1, 2016. CFBF and others representing employers oppose AB 10.

SB 749 will extend the sunset for the provision that allows accidental take for ongoing and routine farming and ranching activities under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). It makes three key clarifications that include 1) when the administrative record is closed for purposes of listing species under CESA; 2) when lease revenues generated from agricultural leases on lands owned by the Department of Fish and Wildlife are deposited, it will ensure that these revenues can be used to support the maintenance and operations of the Department’s lands; and 3) farmers transferring water can maintain non-irrigated cover crops so long as the water used by those crops does not diminish the amount being transferred. SB 749 was recently amended to also extend the sunset of the Department’s Coho recovery planning process. This bill is co-sponsoredby Farm Bureau, the California Cattlemen’s Association, and the California Waterfowl Association.

AB 1038 did not qualify for enrollment and will not go to the Governor. AB 1038 would have established a California Dairy Future Task Force at the California Department of Food and Agriculture to review and recommend changes to the State’s milk pricing system as well as the challenges the dairy industry is facing. This bill was introduced in response to both the fiscal situation dairies are facing and the value of whey under the State’s milk pricing system. AB 1038 is a vehicle that could have been used to implement any compromise agreements between dairy producers and processors about milk pricing going forward. However, ultimately no proposal was developed that both sides could embrace. Farm Bureau supportedthe legislation.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 17th, 2013|

DAIRY DIGESTER PROPOSALS DUE NOV 1

Dairy Digester Project Proposals Sought

The California Department of Food and Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and their partner agencies in the California/Federal Dairy Digester Working Group announced today a joint solicitation for dairy digester concept proposals.

California is the largest dairy state in the USA, with approximately 1.7 million cows producing more than 3.6 million dry tons of manure per year that must be managed to reduce or mitigate environmental impacts. Manure can be processed by anaerobic digesters, sealed containers or tanks where the biological digestion of animal manure can occur, and biogas, a flexible renewable source of energy, is formed.

The ultimate goals of the collaboration are to see the widespread adoption of digester systems to better manage manure and nutrients, help address air and water quality concerns, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and produce renewable energy, fertilizer, and other value-added products.

“California farmers and ranchers are innovators by nature,” said CDFA Secretary Karen Ross. “Dairy digester technology is an idea whose time has come, and that is largely due to work done right here on California’s dairy farms. We are at a point where focused funding can help us make the transition to wider adoption and implementation of digesters in our state.”

“Dairy digesters can benefit the environment by reducing greenhouse gasses and generating renewable energy”, said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “EPA is optimistic that this call for proposals will result in unique and innovative technologies that will benefit California, the nation’s number-one dairy state.”

History

Back in 2011, a partnership of state, federal and local agencies, academia, industry, non-profits and utilities came together to identify and remove barriers to the development and permitting of dairy digester systems in California. The work has culminated in specific recommendations that make digester systems more feasible in the nation’s number-one dairy producing state. The current joint solicitation for dairy digester concept proposals is another important result of the working group.

Proposals

Proposals should include development, installation and operation of dairy manure digester and co-digester projects and may include processes for the treatment and disposal of waste streams from the digester operations to address environmental impacts. Dairy digester and co-digester development is expected to take place on individual dairies or at centralized facilities located within California.

Funding

Funding may be provided by various participating agencies of the California/Federal Dairy Digester Working Group for proposals that are deemed most viable with the greatest measurable outcomes. Individual digester projects will qualify for funding on a case-by-case basis, and projects can potentially receive financial support from multiple participants.

To assist in identifying potential funding sources, the California/Federal Dairy Digester Working Group has created a Funding Matrix document that identifies potential funding sources along with general criteria for the types of projects that would qualify for the funding. A copy of solicitation and the funding matrix can be found at:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/dairy_digester_proposal/dd_solicitation_guidance_v4.pdf

For more information on diary digesters, contact Steve Lyle, Director of Public Affairs, California Department of Food and Agriculture, at 916-654-0462, or go to:

http://www.calepa.ca.gov/digester/Dairies/default.htm http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/EnvironmentalStewardship/Dairy_DigesterS.html

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 17th, 2013|

NET BENEFITS: $5 BILLION; MORE THAN 1 MILLION JOBS TIED TO RELIABILITY OF DELTA WATER SUPPLIES

Brown Administration Drafts Cost/Benefit Report On Bay Delta Conservation Plan

California Natural Resources Board recently announced a new economic analysis of the costs and benefits of Gov. Brown’s plan to revitalize the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem and stabilize water deliveries shows a net benefit to California residents of $4.8 billion to $5.4 billion statewide.

The plan seeks the conservation of 57 different Delta wildlife and plant species. It is an application to federal and state wildlife agencies to permit the continued operation of the Delta-based Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act. Those water projects supply two-thirds of California’s population with at least some of their water supply and provide water to irrigate 3 million acres of farmland in the Central Valley.

No regulation requires such a statewide economic analysis, but it is part of the extensive economic research undertaken by the state to design the plan, weigh its economic impacts, inform the public, and help guide policymakers. The report released Monday is draft and may be revised based upon public comments.

The conservation plan includes 145,000 acres of habitat restoration and protection in the Delta and construction of three new intakes and two tunnels to divert water supplies in ways less harmful to native fish species than possible with the current water project infrastructure. The plan seeks to achieve the dual goals defined by the California Legislature in the Delta Reform Act of 2009: provide a more reliable water supply for California and protect, restore, and enhance the Delta ecosystem.

The economic study concludes that implementation of the $25 billion conservation plan is a worthy investment for the water districts in the Santa Clara Valley, Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, and Southern California that would pay 68 percent of the costs. It finds both positive and negative impacts in the Delta, but far larger statewide benefits from implementing the plan.

“This report compares California’s economic outcomes under the BDCP to the conditions we can expect without BDCP,” said California Natural Resources Secretary John Laird. “The result is clear: Achieving the water supply reliability goal of the BDCP is crucial to California’s economic future. But what cannot be quantified in an economic analysis like this is equally important. By safeguarding and enhancing the fish and wildlife of the largest estuary on the West Coast, we act in the interest of all Californians to come.”

Impacts to the largely agricultural Delta region are significant in terms of temporary, construction-related air pollution and traffic delays and the loss of farm jobs as land is converted to tidal wetlands and other habitat. An estimated 37,000 farm jobs could be lost as habitat restoration is implemented, according to the economic analysis. The economic cost of traffic disruption is estimated at $53 million to $79 million over a nine-year construction period. The study also predicts that the total costs of changes in regional air quality will range up to $16 million.

Overall changes in salinity in Delta waterways due to implementation of the BDCP is expected to cost $1.86 million per year in farm revenues – a decline of less than one-half of one percent of total annual farm revenues in the Delta.

The biggest economic stimulus of the conservation plan would be centered in the Delta. The Delta would be home to an estimated 110,600 construction jobs (over 7.5 years), 11,300 operations and maintenance jobs (over 40 years), and 55,800 jobs related to restoration (over 50 years). (A job is defined in the economic analysis as a position equivalent to one full-time worker for an entire year.)

Measures to protect, restore, and enhance wildlife habitat are expected to provide a net increase to boating, picnicking, wildlife viewing, waterfowl hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities, with net economic benefits estimated at $222 million to $370 million over a 50-year period.

One of 22 conservation measures described in the BDCP involves building three new intakes along the Sacramento River near Hood and twin 35-mile-long tunnels to carry water to the existing SWP and CVP pumping plants in the south Delta near Tracy. The new northern intakes would be screened to protect juvenile salmon and other passing fish species. Use of the new intakes would allow water project operators to reduce pumping in the south Delta, where reverse flows in nearby channels can directly entrain and disorient fish.

The new water delivery system proposed by the conservation plan would also help safeguard water deliveries in the event Delta levees were breached by flood, earthquake, or other forces.

“Because the ultimate economic benefits of the BDCP depend on factors that cannot be known with certainty (e.g., demand growth, future hydrology, future regulations, climate change), an exact quantification of the direct benefits of the BDCP is elusive,” states the economic analysis. “Nonetheless, given the available evidence, two conclusions seem certain. First, the BDCP will result in substantial net benefits to the water contractors that rely on the Delta for at least a portion of their water supplies. Second, implementing the BDCP will reduce a range of risks that are of great consequence to the public. These risks include the vulnerability to floods or earthquakes in the Delta region that may disrupt water exports for an unknown period of time; gradual, long-term sea level rise that could progressively restrict Delta water exports unless mitigating action is taken; and an increasingly strict regulatory environment under the state and federal Endangered Species Acts that could further restrict exports from the Delta.”

Among the key assumptions made in the economic analysis is that operational components that may be implemented as part of the conservation plan to help native fish species recover – including higher seasonal flows to the ocean – may be imposed by federal and state wildlife agencies even if the conservation plan is not implemented. The imposition of such regulations on the current delivery system would significantly reduce the water supplies that could be provided south of the Delta.

For more information about the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, please visit www.baydeltaconservationplan.com

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:16-07:00September 16th, 2013|

JOSE RAMIREZ IS FIGHTING FOR WATER NOV. 9 IN LEMOORE

Fight for Water Extending to Boxing Ring

Jose Ramirez, who has won 11 national championships, won six consecutive, U.S. National titles and gold metals and represented the U.S. in the 2012 Olympics in London, will make his valley pro debut Nov. 9 in Lemoore at the Golden Eagle Arena on the West Hills Community College Campus. His opponent has not yet been announced

The fight is called Fight for Water, as Ramirez is a member of the California Latino Water Coalition and knows very well how reduced water allocations can cause major unemployment for farm workers. “I know about the water crises for Central California farmers and it means the loss of jobs for farmworkers, many of them my friends,” he said.

Born to farm workers, Ramirez grew up in the town of Avenal on the West Side where he started boxing at eight-years old. He not only excelled in the ring, but also out of it, as he was the first in his family to attend a major university.

“I remember growing up and seeing my dad go to work in the fields,” Ramirez said. His dad has since moved up and now works for a custom spray company.

“When there is no water, farmworkers do not have jobs, and that impact their families and communities on the West Side. “The lack of water has been devastating to the West Side, and the possibility of zero water next year will have long-term economic effects on many communities.

“The people who make the decisions on deducing water to farmers have caused a great of damage to many, many families and it must be corrected,” he said

“I’m very much focused on the fight and that’s why I am doing this in my back yard,” said Ramirez. “It is a fight for the most important thing we need to farm the crops that feed our nation.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:17-07:00September 16th, 2013|

DINUBA ACP AREA BEING TREATED NOW

ACP Quarantine Will Extend

Into Fresno County

Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner, Les Wright, in cooperation with the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), announces that an extensive survey and treatment program has begun in response to the detections of Asian citrus psyllid (ACP) near the city of Dinuba in Tulare County.

The recent find in Dinuba is of great concern since 100s of live adults and nymphs were found on nearby trees in the neighborhood. This is the first time live ACPs have been observed on host plants in the San Joaquin Valley. There is now real evidence that there has been a breeding population of the ACP in the valley.

All host plants will be treated within 800 meters of the find; residents within the treatment area will be notified in advance. CDFA will soon establish a quarantine for all citrus plants and fruits within five miles of the find to prevent the movement of host material that may be affected. The prohibition of movement of host plants and fruits will apply to both the homeowner and the commercial citrus grower.

The forthcoming quarantine boundary will extend into Fresno County as far as the city of Reedley. The Fresno County Department of Agriculture is cooperating with the project to ensure that host trees and fruits are not removed from the area under the proposed quarantine.

ACP is a dangerous pest of citrus. The Fresno County Department of Agriculture is in the process of determining the full extent of this incident to protect the state’s vital citrus industry, as well as backyard citrus trees. It must be emphasized that citrus fruit is safe to eat and the disease is not harmful to human health.

Homeowners should be aware that they will also be under the forthcoming quarantine order. If someone needs to move host fruit or trees, including pruning and trimmings, they should contact the project to find out how to properly handle them.

This pest is of grave concern because it can carry the disease huanglongbing (HLB). All citrus and closely related species are susceptible hosts for both the insect and the disease.

There is no cure once a tree becomes infected. The diseased tree will decline in health and produce bitter, mis-shaped fruit until it dies. To date- HLB has only been detected in one backyard tree and one psyllid in the Hacienda Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles County.

Residents in the area who think they may have seen the pest are urged to call the Pest Hotline at 800-491-1899. For more information on the Asian citrus psyllid and huanglongbing disease visit: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/acp/.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:45:17-07:00September 14th, 2013|